ArticleMedicine2017
Optic nerve injury-associated blunt cerebrovascular injury: Three case reports.
Article in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Nonmissile penetrating head injury with a wooden table leg: An illustrative case.Clinical case reports · 2021Article
- Posterior communicating artery injury and symptomatic vasospasm after high-energy blunt head injury: illustrative case.Journal of neurosurgery. Case lessons · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
rationaleBlunt cerebrovascular injury (BCVI) is a rare complication that may occur after craniocervical trauma. The current literature is limited to extracranial carotid artery injuries; however, no reports have been published on blunt intracranial carotid injury (BICI), especially those associated with optic nerve injury. PATIENT CONCERNS: Here we report on 3 BICI cases that demonstrated optic nerve injuries after craniofacial injuries. All 3 patients showed post-trauma vision loss on the injured side. DIAGNOSES: Optical canal fractures can be found in these patients, and carotid sulcus was compressed by the fragments. Computed tomography angiography (CTA) and digital subtraction angiography (DSA) were performed in all 3 patients.
interventionsCase 1 was given no further treatment, except for symptomatic support and rehabilitation therapy. Case 2 was treated with antiplatelet therapy for 3 days, and then a stent was inserted in the injured internal carotid. Case 3 received antiplatelet therapy and a internal carotid compression test was performed simultaneously for 2 weeks, then the injured internal carotid was completely blocked. OUTCOMES: Case 1 developed cerebral infarction that resulted in unilateral hemiplegia. Due to timely treatment, the remaining 2 patients had a better prognosis. LESSONS: CTA should be performed primarily to exclude vascular injury and for CTA-positive patients, a further DSA should be performed to investigate pathological changes and for a definitive diagnosis. At last, the current therapeutic protocols for BCVI are not entirely applicable to intracranial vascular injury, and appropriate protocols for the treatment of BICI should be selected based on the combination of test results and the actual condition of the patient.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.